A WORD FOR TEACHERS
All living beings in the Creative Work – or, in other words, in the overall fate of the Creative Work – evolve. A being progresses from the most primitive to the most perfect form as it evolves. In the beginning it lives as a plant with a merely passive life manifestation and it evolves passively. In its second evolutionary stage, it already lives as an animal with an active life manifestation but still evolves passively. This means that it manifests itself in its decisions and the Law of Reflexion transmits this manifestation, which is the expression of its quality, into its next life. The being progresses through evolution until it reaches the first primitive human incarnation. This being then reincarnates many times as man. Approximately in the middle of its human incarnations, there is a border dividing a being’s evolution. The being has approached the border thanks to its active life manifestation but passive evolution (which is created by the Law of Reflexion). It reaches this border as a human being who has gone through quite a lot of human incarnations. Nevertheless, man crosses an evolutionary border here and moves into the next evolutionary era where, besides an active life manifestation, there is also an active spiritual development. This means that he has come to a new path, and that he slowly eliminates the effect of the Law of Reflexion and starts his own activity and begins changing himself voluntarily. He learns the law of life, fate, evolution, time and timelessness, he recognises himself as a being in evolution and through his understanding he approaches the Podstata, which he originated from. In view of the evolutionary border we can classify people into two groups:
1) Evolutionarily passive.
2) Evolutionarily active.
The meaning of life is the greatest philosophical problem. Partial knowledge of the components of life helps us understand it. One such a component is understanding the meaning of evolution in the Creative Work. Only a pure and true instruction leads to this. However, even such an instruction would miss the goal if it was not presented honestly without the personal demands of the teachers, preachers and informers of a smaller scope. As the partial meaning of a being’s life is large and is a part of the meaning of the life of the Creative Work, the law resulting from higher knowledge applies here:
Wherever and whenever there is an imperfection, it is my imperfection because I am everything.
All of us who live as creatures, as an inseparable part of the Creative Work, are part of the entire unity of this Creative Work.
Once we understand this, we will realise that we should be a positive component in our lives because we will feel that we are everyone, or at least that we are jointly responsible for everybody’s actions. We will learn that we have to take care of everyone and everything for them become better. This will inevitably begin to interest us. And if we have already understood and are trying to progress, or are already progressing actively, it is our duty to pass on the truth to the others and to correct the mistakes. This does not yet make us teachers, but only informers. This is a very sensitive and responsible issue. We must never force anything on anybody, nor promote anything. We can only present what we know, let everyone take what he wants for himself. If he does not want to take it, let him do so. He can either understand voluntarily or stay in the schooling of the Law of Reflexion (Karma). This is everybody’s free will and an ability given by his evolutionary stage.
In understanding this duty, everybody who learns about a spiritual teaching becomes an occasional informer. Later, if one wants to and is able to, one can become a preacher. On another level one can become a teacher, sometimes even a master. But be careful! We still have to recognise the fact that we are only people with human qualities which can interfere with these magnanimous efforts and disturb them. Conceitedness or the desire to be respected and worshiped in this realm are unpleasant traits which numerous people have. As these are lower qualities, it consequently brings either ignorant or even imperfect people to the ranks of honest and true informers and teachers. These people then harm the Whole and themselves as well.
I have said that we can classify people into two groups: evolutionarily passive and evolutionarily active.
If spiritually advanced persons want, and especially, are able to help people on their spiritual (evolutionary) journey as teachers, preachers, or ordinary informants, they have to take this classification into consideration. Each group needs the doctrine to be presented differently. Of course, the teaching must be the same and of good quality because there is only one truth. Therefore, there must be no difference either in the kind of doctrine nor in its quality; the only difference may be in the way it is presented.
Less advanced people are to be presented with the teaching at a lesser depth first, because it can be assumed that belief will prevail over logical reason in their thoughts. Later, they will go deeper and people will be guided towards thinking in balance, i.e. balancing their intuitive component with the rational one. Then, if the teachers are capable, people may be able to gain an in-depth understanding and an understanding of purpose.
Teachers are requisite. Both groups need a lighthouse to guide them in the right direction on their journey. However, are all the current teachers the right lighthouses in the right places? Let’s take a look at the problem and reflect upon it.
Nowadays, “the Truth“ is described by many different doctrines and each doctrine describes it slightly differently. This is understandable and it comes with the influence of this era. After all, we are transitioning from the centripetal era into the centrifugal one. It is a turn between two counterparts which is manifested by great chaos in human thinking. If we realise that man is situated in this turning point and that he is also experiencing a turn on his evolutionary journey – from a passive to an active evolution – then it goes without saying that this puts a great demand on his thinking and his attitude to life. The qualities of man as an individual as well as the dispositions for the spiritual mindset of humankind are being influenced. Some people are influenced more, others less, depending on their evolutionary stage, but all of humanity is impacted.
It may have been a prevailingly centripetal effect of the outgoing era which damaged our doctrines so badly. Its centripetal element influenced man’s qualities towards egoism and egoistic views. Consequently, man accepted the originally true doctrines with his centripetal mindset and reproduced them further under the centripetal influence. The doctrines were deformed, the right knowledge began to disappear and major mistakes were often made. Let’s acknowledge what happened to Jesus’ teaching. Jesus knew the pure truth and spoke about it during his short life. Some of the apostles took fragmentary notes in such a way as they understood the teaching. A long time after Jesus’ death, these notes were sought and gradually collected. Some of them were found, others were not, and other notes, of which it was not known whether they had originated from Jesus’ society at all, also appeared. The Christian doctrine was created from this material. It was understood as the basis. As time passed it was translated and explained in different ways (very often by ignorant people) and thus was already deformed. Then, unpleasant human qualities began working and have been obstructing it until this day. Let’s name a few of them:
1) Ignorance, even though it may be sometimes connected with genuine intentions.
2) Speculation which is often very rough.
3) The ambition to stand out above the others, to be something special, to be important or to become a leader.
4) Haggling with the teaching because the doctrine was uncomfortable for people.
How did these unpleasant qualities manifest themselves in the teaching:
1) Ignorance: Preachers would often learn the doctrine in a schoolish way. They learnt a superficial opinion, terminology, often empty phrases which they learnt by heart and without even comprehending them. They became a kind of clerk in the Church and made decisions concerning the teaching in ignorance. They would often make effort and modify it so that it would be attractive to the crowd and so that the Church would grow and gain power and grandeur. In this case it was necessary to omit what was uncomfortable and what could not be omitted was at least adjusted by a different interpretation. It was usually possible to find somebody who would deliver the requested interpretation for the Church. Then that person was sanctified so as to give his or her opinion sufficient weight. If it was not possible to find somebody expressing a new opinion, the desirable quote was attributed to a person who had died long ago and it became a tradition this way instead. Let’s remember those great Church congresses where naive questions were debated and importance was created from stupidity. Sometimes it was done with the aim to help the Church, sometimes to gain personal importance.
2) Speculation: There have always been people who want to obtain property, social security for themselves, their family or house, or glory. They purposely used human naivety for their own profit. Let’s remember what ignorant people often represented the Church in the highest positions. Noble houses gained control over the Church so as to exercise their interests in personal profit. In the 15th century two men from the House of Medici acceded to the highest post of the Pope. (This House of Medici became famous for poisoning and tyranny in Florencia.) Crusade wars broke out just for the sake of the prey. And all this had to at some point be reasoned in the doctrine as rightful. Nevertheless, we needn’t go so far back in history. Let’s take a look at a period closer to us. It is said that more than a thousand various sects have been established on the grounds of the Christian doctrine. Why were they founded? We must assume that speculative reasons of individuals who wanted to gain a leading position or some property were behind it. Each sect had to differ from the others so as to be morally entitled to be established and to last. For this reason, changes, often quite harsh, were made in the teaching. When a new founder of a Church or sect changed something, his successors copied the new doctrine and added further changes. As the original teaching was copied and changed, it languished and wilted. Not only that, but there were also such speculators who unscrupulously took a doctrine, made small changes to it, gave it a beautiful cover and established a new sect. They wrote a stylistically attractive and gripping treatise and people did not mind that there was not actually anything special to it. They created ceremonies with fabulous vestments, because this impresses ordinary people. They took a putatively sacred object, reputably from the time of Jesus, as their symbol, even though such an object had never existed in such a context. They proclaimed their naive members as the noblemen of spirit (knights), which always flatters simple people. The founder of the sect declared himself or herself a holy incarnation so that the sect grew in importance. People did not mind that the person’s qualities did not correspond with the being whose incarnation he or she claimed to be at all. Moreover, the person sanctified all his or her family members and thus set up a prosperous family business. This is just an illustration of how the Christian doctrine has been treated recently.
3) The ambition to be something special: There is a human trait which has developed strongly especially among evolutionarily lower people. This is the uncontrollable desire to differ from other people, to stand out from other people, to be the centre of attention, simply not to be an ordinary man. This ambition has led numerous people to learn the content of a doctrine in a schoolish fashion so as to make themselves precious and important among people. Despite the fact that their interpretations are flat and empty, some people listen to them. There are also individuals who consciously lie. They award themselves titles which do not belong to them or turn themselves into someone else. They would sacrifice everything for the feeling of being respected. When their interest is exercised in a religious society, they can discourage other people, or they can distort their opinion by being ignorant.
4) Haggling with the teaching for being uncomfortable: The pure truth, the life reality and the right spiritual journey, especially on a higher spiritual level, are not comfortable for people. On this journey, there is an endeavour for man’s change, both internal and external. It requires the repudiation of some bad habits and a necessary change of attitude towards all living creatures and all life. It requires a more accomplished way of thinking and it does not flatter man. The pure truth is inevitably strict because it is invariable! The truth is and always has been what it is. It has never been and never will be what people want it to be! Therefore, it is unpopular among people who think superficially. Those who have spread the truth, have never been popular. When the logical and pure truth interfered with what people had been presented by ignorant people and speculators, the representatives of Churches and sects rose against the speaker of truth. Depending on the style of the period, these representatives either stoned, crucified, burnt, imprisoned or treated the speaker of truth in other “human“ ways. Not only did they rise against those of great knowledge but also against masters, teachers, preachers and transmitters in general, albeit not always so tragically. Spreading a teaching in which there are only few unpopular ideas, causes larger or smaller protective attacks from the teachers who have been speaking about the issues differently. They do not want to admit their ignorance because they think that such a confession would weaken their current popularity. They have usually cultivated a cult of a high guru and worry that they would lose their halo of adoration in the eyes of their admirers. They do not understand that every untruth is revealed sooner or later. A typical and still vivid example is the question of refraining from eating meat. This is no problem, it is clear and commonplace and yet it is fought so strongly because it is unpopular. In some societies, even in such a discipline as Indian yoga, the question of refraining from eating meat is neglected as it is not popular and a lot of applicants would be discouraged. The teachers would then have only a few sheep around them and this would not flatter them. However, the true yoga rightly teaches that before the commencement of yogic disciplines, there is a self-explanatory necessity to go on a philosophical journey through which the disciples change their views and attitude. Then they will understand their unity with all living creatures with self-evidence and realise their nature of the original frugivore and cease to be murderers for food. This behaviour is harmful to them anyway as man has not yet adapted to it, and they will change their cannibalistic way of life based on their understanding. Only after this exculpation of their internal attitude and external body can they begin spiritual exercise. No sooner, because they would damage themselves badly on their spiritual journey. Even the Christian Scripture says: “You cannot pour pure wine into a dirty dish – the wine would spoil.” As refraining from meat is uncomfortable and unpopular, this question is rather passed in silence or glossed over. However, only truly ignorant people or people of just superficial knowledge can do so even though their disciples consider them great gurus. What impression does such a teacher make on a knowledgeable person when he or she tergiversates: “I do not care about my body any longer but my spirit, and therefore I do not pay attention to what I eat. “Only superficial experts place themselves above others by such words to look like a sacred person. Or another statement: “The greatest gurus are no longer interested in what they eat.“
Nevertheless, this is not only a question of refraining from meat. I just gave it as an example. I use it to probe people who I have heard are called masters or gurus. If the person has not been able to comprehend such a self-evident issue, how could he or she then deal with really controversial problems within the spiritual teaching? In these cases the man is ignorant and uncritically copies old and defective ideas which he learnt in a schoolish way, or he wants to be something special in a society of people interested in spiritual doctrines. A knowledgeable person has the duty to pass the knowledge on to other people when asked. However, the person then has to comprehend his or her own triviality, humanity and relative imperfection. The person has to comprehend that being man is only very little. After all, we are, with our human incarnation, just in the middle of evolution.
It is true that some teachers are born with this role and that spiritual teaching is given by their fate. These people were already teachers in their past lives or stood by a great master or a bringer. They had true knowledge in their last life because their master would pass the truth on to them and watch over its purity. However, in their new incarnation they may or may not accept faulty opinions uncritically or put together a defective doctrine from fragments and pass it on. And if their master or bringer is born, they are usually not his helpers anymore, because they already feel themselves to be masters in their human imperfection. The incarnated master or bringer must then look for and raise new helpers, which is definitely a pity.
Teachers must realise that they are to be a positive component of the Creative Work. They are to bring the truth according to their purest conscience. They must disengage from the ambition to be something special, to be admired and adored. They must represent modesty, arisen from true knowledge. They are not to bring the truth because of the bringing itself but for the sake the benefit of the Whole. They are not to haggle with the truth only to be popular or to get away in an unfavourable period.
I know that if the informers, preachers, teachers and masters observe this, all will be good.